Finally some good news!!

[david63]

few leavers can explain exactly why they want to leave,

The majority of leavers knew exactly why they voted to leave and that is to take control of their own destiny - no more straight bananas

[warmweer]

The majority of leavers knew exactly why they voted to leave and that is to take control of their own destiny - no more straight bananas

That sounds like a quote taken straight from the manifest .
Let's be serious and honest about it, I'm willing to bet that less than 5% of the population truly understands what the EU does for a country (positive and negative). Having said this - I can't vouch for the information I think I know but I try to check the "facts" and try to objectively evaluate them listening to all sides and scrutinising the information provided.

[Wirral Talk]

My main reason for wanting Brexit is that it is easier to control/overthrow one rubbish Government than two rubbish Governments.

That's demagogic b*llshit and only focuses on the drawbacks of having extra legislation (which BTW is agreed upon through a system designed by representatives of all participating countries) AND leaves room for (too) many exceptions for specific countries (which is not something I'm a priori against).

No, its not the legislation (that is a separate issue) its control over the Government and our future.

We have voted loads of "Labour" MPs out of their constituency position and this will have an impact on our national Government.

The country voted loads of UKIP MEPs in, and this will have minimal, if any, effect on the EU Government.

The EU is biased towards destructive division, look at the Euro (yes I know we aren't in the Eurozone but its about policy and attitude), because its an average for the Eurozone, it favours the well performing countries by being undervalued and making their exports cheap yet it is overvalued for the poorer performing countries making their exports expensive and hampering their recovery. It is clearly divisive, the division will get wider, where is the policy to get round this problem?

How can a country who is a net producer of goods have the same tariffs and quotas with the rest of the world as another country who is a net consumer of those same goods. Yes, it promotes internal tariff free trade but the EU can't be self contained and ignore world trading. One of those countries is losing out because of the quotas and tariffs, the other isn't.

Is there any hope of proper recovery of the southern EU states? Germany, France and the UK have been pouring subsidies into the EU for many years, those subsidies are supposed to be used to level out all the EU economies but the enormous amount of money has not achieved much at all, instead it has been used to bribe more under-performing economies into joining the EU and boosting the EU's elite votes.

The EU needs to get a grip, instead of promoting silly metal statues on roundabouts it should be looking at things like protecting everybody's pension which should be a basic human right.

The EU should also be looking at reducing working life not increasing it, we are supposed to be free people not slaves to employment. In a very small number of generations we have gone from one partner working to both partners working, their hours have increased, their retirement age has increased.

The EU has some controls over VAT and duty but ridiculous import loopholes where a company outside the EU doesn't have to charge VAT or duty but a company inside the EU does? This has a substantial effect on EU retailers making their sales less competitive.

[warmweer]

...
The EU has some controls over VAT and duty but ridiculous import loopholes where a company outside the EU doesn't have to charge VAT or duty but a company inside the EU does? This has a substantial effect on EU retailers making their sales less competitive.

The question of VAT and subsidy isn't as simple as that. you should also take the cost/income of providing local labour into account( just an example - by far not the only economic factor).
Thanks to the 6 founding countries (actually the EU originated from the the BeNeLux (3 countries) which in turn has its origin in the EGKS (2 countries), southern countries like Spain and Portugal, and also Ireland have been able to increase their welfare seriously. With more countries joining, mostly weaker economic forces (in certain areas), assets will be divided to help the "weaker" countries. The whole point was/is to make the union stronger than the sum of its parts and to tackle major problems on a more "global" level. It's hasn't worked all the time but major economic disasters have been avoided or alleviated thanks to the Union.

Europe hasn't been (and never will be) able to solve all problems but at least there is now an economic force to be reckoned with on a global scale and the "weaker" countries have generally been the main beneficiaries (in many areas).

It's so easy to pinpoint out all the flaws of a system (and there are many) and unfortunately that's were many politicians like to score (misinformation, even disinformation). It's a fact that the Brexit campaign was based on selected (negative) information and that should have be reason enough to question the results.
But hey, what's done is done and I seriously doubt it can be stopped so let's get it over with as quickly as possible and reduce the damage to both parties (although it seems the Brexiteers are confident there will only be one losing party and it ain't gonna be them).

[3Di]

Thanks to the 6 founding countries (actually the EU originated from the the BeNeLux (3 countries) which in turn has its origin in the EGKS (2 countries)

Actually the EU born from the Treaty of Rome afaik, which was signed by
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Rome#Signing

Belgium
West Germany
France
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands

[Wirral Talk]

The EGKS (aka ECSC) countries were Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany.

There is a good graphic of how it all came together HERE

I'll get off my soapbox on Brexit, it is a polarising topic.

[warmweer]

The EGKS (aka ECSC) countries were Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany.

There is a good graphic of how it all came together HERE

I'll get off my soapbox on Brexit, it is a polarising topic.

I stand corrected :confusion with the BLEU (Belgium Luxembourg Economic Union), a predecessor to the Benelux.

[Mick]

having stupid laws thrust upon us

no more straight bananas

Thats one of ‘em!

And:

Toasters
Tea bags
Balloons
Pet horses (would you eat yours?)
Lights bulbs (technically that should be lamps but what the hey)

And so it goes on - ad infinitum it would seem.

Then there’s the debacle over naming the then new currency. I seem to remember it took many months and several millions of £’s (mostly junket money - these buggers didn’t stay in B&B’s) to negotiate then they came up with “Euro”. They could have achieved that in an hour with a bunch of primary school kids for nothing.

It will be nice to have control of our fishing waters back as well.

[warmweer]

It will be nice to have control of our fishing waters back as well.

These Brits ... always fishy business

[Tastenplayer]

In principle, the founding of the EU was a good idea.
The 1st problem is that some countries have less to say than others.
The biggest problem, however, is that the member states in the EU are far too different. Other countries - different customs! (Many people already have trouble getting along well with their foreign neighbours. In my village last year it had just been 55.92% Swiss inhabitants (31.12.18 I have long noticed, that when all the old Swiss have died, more foreigners will live here than "genuine" Swiss people). https://abload.de/img/statistik8skbi.png

The EU should also be looking at reducing working life not increasing it.

That's what they've been wanting to do in Switzerland for a long time. But there are hardly any more jobs for job seekers over 40, especially for women. In addition, many people over the age of 50 are dismissed because they have simply become too expensive.

[Mick]

Originally, in the UK anyway it was EC which was fine but the whole union thing doesn’t gel with me.

Also, another daft thing from EU law is zero hours contracts which were basically illegal here until the EU interfered.

[warmweer]

The 1st problem is that some countries have less to say than others.

To me it doesn't constitute a problem: initially that is. Eventually all members should be equal, although a weighting in certain areas does appropriate.

The biggest problem, however, is that the member states in the EU are far too different. Other countries - different customs!

It can constitute a problem but on the other hand as long as the ideology is similar: different customs are enriching (again: in certain areas).

[DTMWC]

Brexit has some advantages but staying in also has some advantages, there seems to be so much hate between Remainers and Leavers so regardless of if we end up staying or leaving... I wouldn't be at all surprised to see us ending up with violent protests on the streets like a few years ago in the Ukraine and Turkey etc.

If remain had won and we were going to renegotiate with the EU... I wonder if we would have still been renegotiating that 3 years on too

[warmweer]

Whatever happens, half the population will be happy, and the other half won't and the blaming game will continue. It's the same story everywhere whichever side you're on: "We" were right and "They" were wrong.

[warmweer]

British politics (and laws) remain a mistery to me.
From what I gather, the PM is forced (under law) to request an extension of art. 50.
Can anyone explain to me how an unsigned letter in which an extension is (so-called) requested.
Perhaps my English isn't up to par but I fail to see the actual request. Can someone point out where that extension is formally requested in the letter?

The UK Parliament has passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019. Its provisions now require Her Majesty's Government to seek an extension of the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, currently due to expire at 11 p.m. GMT on 31 October 2019, until 11 p.m. GMT on 31 January 2020.

I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty.

The formulation : "is seeking" doesn't qualify as a formal request to me (and I'll emphasise that I do have experience with official letters (and requests) to official institutions).

Even in the case the formulation is acceptable for a request, the fact that the letter is unsigned casts doubts on the validity of such a request.
I'm not even going to consider the implications of the second letter, completely undermining the legally required official request for an extension.

Frankly, the EU should request the British Parliament to provide clarification as to the intentions since any extension granted, can (I fear) be considered as unilaterally decided on and therefore uncalled for.

A cover note from Sir Tim Barrow, the UK's representative in Brussels, explained the first letter complied with the law as agreed by Parliament.

Where can I see that cover note?